Could you arrange to leave me OUT of any part that includes SF or LA? ...Thanks!
Posted on 11/04/2010 11:25:19 AM PDT by SmithL
It is hard to criticize their bench when looking at ours.
The opportunity for grooming candidates went out the window with Arnold.
The GOP won’t recover from the Schwarzenegger experiment for a decade, at least.
Total non-federal revenues in California exceed $100 Billion so this $300 Million also did not make a big mark (it’s a far cry from “30% of the revenue side of their budget”) .”
You’re confusing interest paid on the debt with total financing raised by issuance of the debt. I never stated that the fed contribution was 30% of anything. I stated the total BAB’s issued accounted for 30% of total revenues(incorrect) as opposed to 30% of total financing (correct) for 2010. The Feds then pay 35% of all interest due the bondholders on the BABs. For California if Sullivan’s numbers are correct that would equal roughly 10.5% of the total interest due to debt issuance in 2010. At a 7.5% yield based on the 35% fed contribution that would come to about 2.5% annual interest payment on 2010 debt issuance from the Feds.
I don’t think California in particular or any other state should have participated although they felt as though the needed to. If I were a State Treasurer I would think long and hard before going this route as the Feds have witheld payments on these bonds from some states including California based upon some IRS rulings.
My point in the original post was that California (the state with the lowest credit rating) took a step in the wrong direction by electing someone like Brown and bucking the national trend in their state legislature where elsewhere democrats were thrown out of state houses wholesale. These interest guarantees by DC are encouraging states who otherwise have difficulty accessing the credit markets to take on more debt instead of making the cuts necessary to rebuild their budgets. Texas which is fiscally much stronger than California is getting ready to cut like crazy but they also wiped out a ton of democrats in the state house on tuesday which should make the job much easier.
Unless things change California will be the first among possibly 3 or 4 states (or more) to become insolvent if we get another credit seizure like late 08 and with this new congress there won’t be any help this time around.
“I agree with you and PSJones. It was Arnold vs the Unions. It seems that 3 of the 5 props were hard core anti-state union, but the others were pretty common sense.
The unions threw so much money against the props and at Arnold, he never recovered.
The vaunted conservatives of California didn’t come out to vote. It was a low turnout. the only ones who came out were the the CTA, SEIU, etc. I think teachers were even sending anti proposition flyers home with the kiddies. Crying 5 year olds saying their teacher was going to be fired. Typical CTA nonsense.”
Add to that the nurses’ union (CNA), the cops (PORAC), Prison Guards (CCPOA) and the firefighters, as well. I was still working at the hospital then, and I was up to my eyeballs in their lies and distortions about the ballot measures and the nurses were all heavily propagandized on the whole thing. They were being told that the ballot measures would cost them their jobs, and other such nonsense, when they did nothing of the kind.
Arnold’s first term was better than people on here seem to remember, up until that particular ballot fight. After that, he knew he had NO backup from the GOP here, especially the “hard right”. They disappeared from the voting that year. The same guys that couldn’t get McClintock elected to the Lt. Gov seat in 2006 or Controller in 2002. Even had we had someone better than Arnold in the Governor’s office, they still would have had to deal with a Senate and Assembly that were not only Democrat majority, but just shy of 2/3 SUPERmajority. I don’t care WHO you put in that spot, even Reagan himself, the problems here were not going to get fixed.The fact of the gerrymandered districts here put paid to any chance of that.
As far as not spending money here on further GOP operations, all well and good, except how much does the GOP get OUT of CA by way of donations? It’s probably pretty close to even, if not a net outflow of money.
Kinda like what Fedzilla has been getting from CA for a long time now. CA gets 78 cents on the dollar of taxes sent to DC. Yeah, they’re sending some here by way of the bonds mentioned in this thread, but it’s very little to make up for decades of taking. It sure would help if the Feds also took care of their responsibilities at the border, too.
That’s substantively a major part of both the financial and electoral problems that California faces.
Why? Kalifornia is a lost cause. Moonbeam will finish them off.
LOL thats funny.
How can that be?
California didn't run any Tea Party candidates .
I don’t want to argue. But the fed subsidy is NOT a percent of the bonds issued (i.e. total financing) - it is for a portion of the interest paid on those bonds, a relatively miniscule amount (as you said, “2.5% annual interest payment”).
I agree with you that California did not need any excuses to issue more debt - I’ve been fighting that battle in California for years (we ‘lovingly’ refer to it as Cal Bondage). The voters keep approving more and more bonds thanks largely to politicians telling them they are “free” (”We can pay for this without raising taxes” was Arnie’s screed as he tripled the state debt in 7 short years).
Memo to the Republican Party:
In California, limit financial support to House candidates in districts that are competetive. Retain every House seat possible and shoot for additional seats that seem within reach. DO NOT waste one more thin dime on statewide races of any kind, including presidential. To waste money on those races would be foolish, and donors need to keep their checkbooks slammed shut until you promise to cut off all financial assistance to statewide candidates in California.
Thank you.
You’re right! I’d forgotten about all the Nurse Nancys running around crying doom. Are Nurses actually unionized? The only ones I’ve seen are fresh from the Philippines or a few old-timers. I think they mostly are just looking for a doctor to get hitched to. Not my industry, just a reckless guess.
Could you arrange to leave me OUT of any part that includes SF or LA? ...Thanks!
When Meg had the illegal alien problem, the Mexican-American community in L.A. broke for Brown 2:1 and came out in larger numbers than expected. Then, they just voted straight democrat ticket.
All you heard on the radio was (1) Carly sent 30K jobs overseas and (2) When people called in, every story was about how they or someone they knew who worked at H.P. hated her guts. I suspect many of those were seminar callers from the CTA or SEIU who called in with those talking points.
NO one cared a whit about the DREAM act or DADT, except a very small percentage of the voters.
Jobs were the main issue, but when she was painted as someone who shipped jobs off-shore and couldn't mount a decent defense - like Apple, Cisco, etc, sends their work overseas - that didn't help.
She tried to avoid the kobs issue, instead of clearly explaining how DEMOCRAT POLICIES sent those jobs overseas.
And I still don’t understand why she didn’t do that.
kobs=jobs
Time for bed.
Muleskinner - go back to 2007 and 2008 threads here at FR. Freepers were saying the same thing every day. The NRSC have been working on recruiting her for years knowing damn well that she was despised in this state by the majority of those who had heard of her. But the arrogant SOBs forged ahead anyway. She was a terminally flawed candidate and should have never been considered. But the "smart leaders" in Washington continue to think they know what is best for California. Go Riordan! /s
NO one cared a whit about the DREAM act or DADT, except a very small percentage of the voters.
You mean, like conservative ones? How about her support for global warming nonsense? Do ya think anyone cared "a whit" about that? There are 5.3 registered Republicans, 7.6 million registered Democrats, and 3.5 million registered DTS voters in California. 3.2 million people voted for Carly, 3.9 million voted for Boxer. We see the same thing election after election -- people are simply not inspired to show up because there was little to vote FOR.
Jobs were the main issue, but when she was painted as someone who shipped jobs off-shore and couldn't mount a decent defense - like Apple, Cisco, etc, sends their work overseas - that didn't help.
Of course it didn't help. Nor did those who were employed by HP/Lucent or those that lost 1/2 their investment with HP's affirmative action experiment. It also didn't help that her big "jobs" program sounded like a corporate welfare program and a liberal's big-government dream. Or that she ran endless ads on TV touting how she would go against her party "when they were wrong" (when SHE was wrong on so many issues!)
Go ahead and believe that it was all a union conspiracy and folks really liked her. I guess if Carly was pro-"choice" you think she would have won?
lol....Someone that knows what their talking about....You go calcowgirl....
If California is broken into different territories prior to being readmitted to the Union, your red county may well be part of a new state, free from LA or SF.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.